I don't agree with you. 1. OSU is the pre-season #2 team. In term of talent, both teams are equal. In terms of experiences, they even have advantages. And B. Wells is healthy. 2. They played "Tressel-ball" to absolute perfection on the first half. Low scores are no surprise. It's normal. 3. They have more desire to redeem themselves. 4. Their Q-package exploited our shortcomings at the safeties well.
However, we were not panic when they were leading. Moreover, we had absolute confidence and poise that we would score the final TD and indeed controlled the clock well. In my opinion, it is the characteristic of the champion. The champion can still win the game even it is not your A-game. The most important thing is W, not style points.
Besides, if you use style points as the major reference, we won Sooners by 10 points in the neutral field, while Gators won by 10 points in their home.
UT的隊型面對這樣的OSU是會“一不小心“就變成低比數的。因為： a) 我們沒有能撕裂對方防線的速度型跑陣(懷念Charles) b) OC Davis（UT永遠的不穩定因子!）在大比賽容易保守。這場比賽不敢丟長球, 也就錯失拉開比賽的契機跟拉大對方防守網的契機。 所以我們可以在第三節大幅領先。但只要一有失誤, 喪失球權，就會陷入苦戰。
4 comments:
I don't agree with you.
1. OSU is the pre-season #2 team. In term of talent, both teams are equal. In terms of experiences, they even have advantages. And B. Wells is healthy.
2. They played "Tressel-ball" to absolute perfection on the first half. Low scores are no surprise. It's normal.
3. They have more desire to redeem themselves.
4. Their Q-package exploited our shortcomings at the safeties well.
However, we were not panic when they were leading. Moreover, we had absolute confidence and poise that we would score the final TD and indeed controlled the clock well. In my opinion, it is the characteristic of the champion. The champion can still win the game even it is not your A-game. The most important thing is W, not style points.
Besides, if you use style points as the major reference, we won Sooners by 10 points in the neutral field, while Gators won by 10 points in their home.
So, MNC is still MNC.
太好了，我就知道我這個應該會召喚王教授出來XD
我也說了，OSU是個強隊，我也認為這是場勢均力敵的比賽，因為不管數據怎麼說，不管大家誰是underdog或誰佔上風，進了前十大家其實比的都差不多。不過就是你說的，我們有那個冠軍的潛質。不過我更希望的是一場節奏掌握在我們手裡的好比賽，分數拉開一些。
只是雙方在某些程度上都在壓迫對手做得很透徹。所以上半場的棒球比數，還真是非常令人窒息，總有看日職那種1:0結束的抑鬱感。
至於我第一句話，那是ESPN賽後毒舌分析，我也只是拿來說嘴，因為我很生氣我們居然輸給TTU，那真是要嘔出幾十兩血了。
當然，我們長角牛還是踏平了Buckeyes，期待明年新的五星級QB可以出來現身一下，給大家看看不同球風啊～
基本上OSU教練Tressel的比賽是以低比數著稱的。他以善於“管理"比賽著稱，並且以此作為跑陣與防守戰的建軍根本大略，尤其前幾年有Nugent這種一踢定江山的王牌踢球員時更明顯。
UT的隊型面對這樣的OSU是會“一不小心“就變成低比數的。因為：
a) 我們沒有能撕裂對方防線的速度型跑陣(懷念Charles)
b) OC Davis（UT永遠的不穩定因子!）在大比賽容易保守。這場比賽不敢丟長球, 也就錯失拉開比賽的契機跟拉大對方防守網的契機。
所以我們可以在第三節大幅領先。但只要一有失誤, 喪失球權，就會陷入苦戰。
我對於ESPN的"Style Points“論十足感冒。不論樣本稀少所造成的代表性問題，style points本身就是可操弄的。
比方說，某隊今年上半場大幅領先後，在下半場仍繼續使用First Team 在場上，也是繼續使用一級攻擊策略堆積分數(而非消化時間策略)。於是造就了他們“似乎“攻擊無敵的假面, 甚至溜進了全國冠軍賽。果然，大比賽(不論全國冠軍賽或Red River Rivalry)時遇到防守強隊，進攻就鱉了。
這種"Style Points"論讓UT今年錯失了全國冠軍賽的機會，當年甚至讓VY錯失了Heisman Award（當年下半場他就下去休息了, 不然數字會更嚇人）。
新QB的球風是適合現在的戰術。所以UT球風應不會有太大改變，而且後來才會上場啦! 不過他是pro style, 應有較多長球攻擊。
Post a Comment